You clearly haven't heard the latest version of "Who Killed Davey Moore?".

There isn't one, just so you don't go looking, or at least not as far as I'm aware, feel free to go looking if you like. Its a song I've always wanted to cover though because it doesn't flow well at all and I want to make it better. Even if I can't sing.

You clearly haven't heard the latest version of "Who Killed Davey Moore?".

There isn't one, just so you don't go looking, or at least not as far as I'm aware, feel free to go looking if you like. Its a song I've always wanted to cover though because it doesn't flow well at all and I want to make it better. Even if I can't sing.

You clearly haven't heard the latest version of "Who Killed Davey Moore?".

There isn't one, just so you don't go looking, or at least not as far as I'm aware, feel free to go looking if you like. Its a song I've always wanted to cover though because it doesn't flow well at all and I want to make it better. Even if I can't sing.

I dunno, fifty years ago playing standards - ie covering songs - was a norm and writing your own was an exception. I think there's nothing to covering a song, if you like it - you play it. It doesn't even have to be a flattery, unless you consider anknowledgement that someone wrote a song worth performing a flattery. Writing your own songs should be as much of an issue, seeing how 90% of people writing songs don't have anything new to add to idea pool. Of course, if your cover is somehow substantially different from original, that makes is actually worthwhile for a listener too."Improving the song", though, sounds like a bit too pretentious reason (thus Bono), though Dylan did have his slump period, I figure to most of his fans, thinking of improving his version would be considered a blasphemy. (Well... to others, anything is improvement to his nasal singing. Like check out White Stripes' great vestion of "One more coffee before I go.)

A few more covers that I prefere to originals:The Decemberists cover of "Bridges and Baloons".Queens of the Stone Age cover of "Who'll be the next in line".Which is really something seeing how I like original artists.

Ok. It wouldn't be better, and I'll never make it because I can neither sing, nor play an instrument nor lead people of a band-worthy persuasion to perform it how I have in mind. Plus even if I did make, no one would ever notice in the vast ether that is the internet. Who killed Davey Moore is a song I heard as a child on holiday with my dad and it stuck in my head, but I didn't hear it for years and years. Over that time I essentially idolised this song into something it isn't. The main problem I have with it is the way it stops and starts everywhere and doesn't get itself in gear until the last verse, which is brilliant, but by then its too late. All he had to do was reword the verses and repeat the chorus so the whole thing can flow and it would have been great. So that's my plan. But I have no illusions about the fact that my revised version will never happen.

McDuffies wrote:Well... to others, anything is improvement to his nasal singing.

Hey, don't be dissin' da Dylan, yo!

Ahem.

Personally his voice has grown on me over the years and I'm actually quite fond of his original way of singing, at least it's unpretentious and not digitally tweaked like they do with many modern so-called "stars" who sing the occasional (or frequent) off-tune when recording songs.

But then I view Dylan's stuff more as poetry that happens to be accompanied by instruments. As a songwriter he certainly has no equal. I can understand why people would not like his voice, and there are some great covers of his songs; but certain songs, I feel, work best with his voice, because they sound so much more believable coming from him. ("Like a Rolling Stone", "Positively 4th Street"...)

I'm very much into my singer-songwriters. A singer who only does covers, well, may make great music, but I don't respect them as much as people who can write their own stuff (and do it well). Even a cover sung by a proper artist (singer-songwriter) scores higher with me than a cover sung by someone who only sings covers (or stuff written by others for them).

I listen to more than a few singers to whose voice I had to get used to, but then I grew to like it. On the other hand, I'm instantly put off by singers with perfect, radio-friendly voice.Like David Byrne said, it's easier to empathize with a singer who isn't perfect. You're more likely to believe him.

I'm very much into my singer-songwriters. A singer who only does covers, well, may make great music, but I don't respect them as much as people who can write their own stuff (and do it well). Even a cover sung by a proper artist (singer-songwriter) scores higher with me than a cover sung by someone who only sings covers (or stuff written by others for them).

I dunno, for instance I respect Johnny Cash as much as any singer-songwriter, even though larger part of his oeuvre consists of covers. Just listening to any American recording makes it clear why: through his performance, he rewrites the subtext of the song. While I like good lyrics as much as the next guy, I do believe that music is more defining of the message of the song, and through covering, you have a chance to change the point, from tweaking it in tone to completely turning it upside-down, which is what Cash was doing.Sure most of people who cover songs are just paying tribute or buying time, but if you're good, covering may as well be equal to rewriting the song.

I don't liken Playing standards to covering a song. Plus aside from Jazz I haven't really looked into a lot of the standarding of the day.

McDuffies wrote:I dunno, for instance I respect Johnny Cash as much as any singer-songwriter, even though larger part of his oeuvre consists of covers. Just listening to any American recording makes it clear why: through his performance, he rewrites the subtext of the song. While I like good lyrics as much as the next guy, I do believe that music is more defining of the message of the song, and through covering, you have a chance to change the point, from tweaking it in tone to completely turning it upside-down, which is what Cash was doing.

I like some of Cash's stuff for sure, but I still wouldn't rank him as high as my favourite singer-songwriters. That said he DID write some of his own songs and is classified as a singer-songwriter, even though the majority of his records were covers / not written by him.

Some cover songs are amazing, I don't deny that.

But I was really talking about those singers that would simply not be able to write a good song themselves even if their lives depended on it. I just don't see them as real artists.

Performing a song is a whole different set of skills from writing a song. To compare them would be like comparing craft of a playwright with craft of an actor performing his play.Or think about it this way: many people think that comic artist's job is simply illustrating what writer draws, but is it true? Or is the way in which the story is presented as much important as the story itself?A lot of creativity can be found in just playing someone else's music, after all isn't art all about channeling of an idea through artistic medium, and I think that great interpreters are capable of channeling their own ideas through other people's songs. They're real artists, it's just that many of them aren't any good at their art.